Clinical RelevanceLuting agents have significant effects when used to bond indirect restorative materials to dentin. In the present study, resin cements performed better than water-based cements, especially self-etch and one of two self-adhesive resin cements. SUMMARYThe aim was to compare eight types of luting agents when used to bond six indirect, laboratory restorative materials to dentin. cements]). After water storage at 378C for one week, the shear bond strength of the specimens (n¼8/group) was measured, and the fracture mode was stereomicroscopically examined. Bond strength data were analyzed with two-factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Newman-Keuls' Multiple Range Test (a¼0.05). Both the restorative material and the luting agent had a significant effect on bond strength, and significant interaction was noted between the two variables. Zinc phosphate cement and glass ionomer cements produced the lowest bond strengths, whereas the highest bond strengths were found with the two self-etch and one of the self-adhesive resin cements. Generally, the fracture mode varied markedly with the restorative material. The luting agents had a bigger influence on bond strength between restorative materials and dentin than was seen with the restorative material.
This in vitro study evaluated the effect of presence of post, presence of core, and of shape, type, and surface treatment of posts on resistance to cyclic loading of crowned human teeth. For all teeth, crowns designed without ferrule were cast in sterling silver and luted with resin cement (Panavia F). Each tooth underwent cyclic loading of 600 N at two loads per second until failure. Teeth that had only been crowned showed significantly higher resistance to cyclic loading than teeth with cores or with post and cores. No significant differences were found between teeth restored with cores only or with post and cores, irrespective of surface-treatment of the posts. Teeth restored with parallel-sided cast post (ParaPost XP) and cores showed significantly higher resistance to cyclic loading than teeth with either tapered cast posts or untreated prefabricated posts of titanium alloy (ParaPost XH) or glass fiber composite (ParaPost Fiber White). No significant difference was found between teeth restored with parallel-sided cast post and cores and teeth restored with untreated prefabricated posts of zirconia (Cerapost). Surface treatment of posts significantly increased the resistance to cyclic loading compared with untreated posts. When posts are used, surface treatment is recommended.
Survival of endodontically treated, post-restored teeth depends on a multitude of factors, all of which are practically impossible to include in a randomized, controlled clinical study. The purpose of this survey was to characterize and analyze reported failures of post-retained restorations to identify factors critical to failure and to type of failure. A questionnaire was mailed to private practitioners in Denmark with a request to complete the questionnaire whenever a patient presented with a failed post-retained restoration. Information was gathered on factors related to the patient, the tooth, the restorative materials, and the techniques. Two-hundred and sixty questionnaires were collected from 171 practitioners over a 3-year period. Functioning time until failure varied between 3 months and 38 years. Mean survival time until failure was 11 years. Of the failed restorations, 61% had functioned for 10 years or less. Fracture of the tooth was the most common type of failure reported, followed by loosening of the post and fracture of the post. Tapered posts implied an increased risk of tooth fracture compared to loosening or fracture of the post, and the relative risk of tooth fracture increased with the functioning time until failure. Fracture of the post was more common among male than female patients. On the basis of this survey of failed post-retained restorations, it was concluded that tapered posts were associated with a higher risk of tooth fracture than were parallel-sided posts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.